Thanks everyone, and special thanks to Flu for making the call I don’t have time for! I confirms my sense of where things *should* stand.
I think I’ll get the renter’s insurance, but I am not doing the “additional insured” bit, even if I were to go with a carrier that offered it. If landlord insists, he’ll have to pony up the documents that show my non-compliance would violate my lease, i.e. raise his rates or cause him to lose coverage.
My lease also gives me the option of covering the cost of his higher premium, if there is one, instead of insuring myself. If that’s cost effective for the renter, I would be blown away.
The other thing that’s curious is whether he actually has this new carrier yet or not — if it’s the carrier that is requiring insurance and additional insured status, wouldn’t they require proof before the policy took effect?
For a law office, the language is terribly imprecise. For example, I’m pretty sure you can’t “renew” a policy with a new carrier. They could be using “additional insured” incorrectly, too.
Thanks as always! (Maybe this will be my last rental…)
